United Steel Workers Local No. 5114, on behalf of Miners v. Hecla Limited
United Steel Workers Local No. 5114, on behalf of Miners v. Hecla Limited (FMSHRC WEST 2012-466-CM): Nineteen miners awarded $13,150.48 plus interest
What's the rule today?
This ALJ decision was superseded by the Commission's decision in the same case. Ezel starts from the controlling decision and answers your situation under current law, with citations.
Plain-English summary
The United Steelworkers sought Mine Act compensation for miners affected by section 103(k) withdrawal orders at Hecla's Lucky Friday Mine. An earlier ALJ order determined which miners qualified, and the parties then stipulated that 19 miners were owed compensation for work performed from December 6 through December 14, 2011. Judge Richard W. Manning approved the stipulation and ordered Hecla to pay $13,150.48 plus interest calculated under federal back-pay guidelines. The payment was due in the first full pay period after the decision and no later than 14 days after entry. The Commission later affirmed the award in west-2012-466-cm-commission.
Decision snapshot
- Governing provision: 30 U.S.C. § 821
- Outcome: Hecla was ordered to pay 19 miners $13,150.48 plus interest under the parties' stipulation.
- Subsequent review: The Commission affirmed the compensation award in west-2012-466-cm-commission.
- Key point: Once eligibility was resolved, a supported stipulation could establish the miners and precise compensation owed under section 111.
Full text (FMSHRC public release)
FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH
REVIEW COMMISSION
OFFICE OF
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGES
721 19TH
STREET, SUITE 443
DENVER, CO 80202-2536
TELEPHONE: 303-844-3577
/ FAX: 303-844-5268
February 4, 2015
UNITED
STEELWORKERS LOCAL NO.
5114,
ON BEHALF OF MINERS,
Applicant
v.
HECLA
LIMITED,
Respondent
COMPENSATION
PROCEEDING
Docket
No. WEST 2012-466-CM
Lucky
Friday Mine
Mine
ID 10-00088
FINAL DECISION AND
ORDER ON APPLICATION FOR COMPENSATION
Appearances: Susan
J. Eckert, Esq., Santarella
& Eckert, LLC, Littleton, Colorado, for Applicant;
Laura
Beverage, Esq., and Karen Johnston, Esq., Jackson Kelly PLLC, Denver, Colorado,
for Respondent.
Before: Judge
Manning
This Compensation Proceeding is
before me pursuant to section 111 of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of
1977, 30 U.S.C. § 801 et seq. (the “Act”), upon an application for compensation
filed by the United Steel Workers, Local 5114 on behalf of miners (“USW”)
against Hecla Limited. On November 14, 2014, Hecla and USW filed simultaneous motions
for partial summary decision in this matter. On December 23, 2014, I issued an
order granting, in part, Hecla’s motion for partial summary decision.[1]
Steelworkers Local 5114 v. Hecla Limited, 36 FMSHRC _, No. WEST
2012-466-CM, 2014 WL 7464233 (Dec. 2014), amended at 37 FMSHRC _, 2015
WL 226135 (Jan 5, 2015). That order, as amended, is incorporated herein by
reference. In that order, I encouraged the parties to stipulate to the specific
miners due compensation in accordance with my order and the amount of compensation
due each miner.
On February 3, 2015, the parties
filed a joint stipulation “Regarding Specific Miners Due Compensation and the
Amount of Compensation” (the “Joint Stipulation”). The parties identified 19
miners who are entitled to compensation under section 111 of the Act based on
my December 23, 2014 order. The name of each miner and the amount owed to each
miner are identified in Joint Exhibit A, which is incorporated herein by
reference. The amount of compensation was calculated by Hecla using “the
miners’ regular rates of pay for
hours worked between December 6 and 14, 2011.” Joint
Stipulation at 1. The total amount of compensation due excluding interest is
$13,150.48.
The parties stipulated that
“[i]nterest on the total compensation amounts set forth in Joint Exhibit A will
be calculated using the OPM guidelines for back pay annual interest rates by
quarter based on IRS official rates pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 5596 and 5 C.F.R. §§
550.801-808. See also Local 2274 v. Clinchfield Coal Co., 10 FMSHRC
1493, 1504-06 (Nov. 1988). The interest is to accrue up to the date of the
Court’s entry of a decision and order in this matter.” Joint Stipulation at 2.
The parties further stipulated
that “[u]pon entry of the Court’s decision and order, the operator will
calculate the interest due as of that date and compensate the miners
accordingly. Such compensation, which shall be subject to standard withholdings
for taxes and shall be reported on a W2 Form, will be processed and paid to the
miners in the first full pay period immediately following the date of the
Court’s decision and order is entered and in a time period not to exceed
fourteen days.” Id.
As stated above, the amount of
compensation due under section 111 of the Act was calculated based on my order
of December 23, 2014. Upon issuance of that order, I advised the parties not to
file a petition for interlocutory review with the Commission if they disagreed
with my order. I advised them that once I issued my final decision, the issues
of fact and law discussed in my December 23, 2014, order would be ripe for
review should either party wish to petition the Commission for review.
ORDER
I find that the terms of the Joint
Stipulation comply with the requirements of section 111 of the Act. Hecla
Limited is hereby ORDERED to pay $13,150.48 plus interest to the miners
listed in Joint Exhibit A in accordance with the parties’ Joint Stipulation. The
parties SHALL COMPLY with all the terms and conditions set forth in the
Joint Stipulation. Upon compliance with these terms, this proceeding is DISMISSED.
/s/ Richard W. Manning
Richard
W. Manning
Administrative
Law Judge
Distribution:
Susan
J. Eckert, Esq., Santarella & Eckert, LLC, 7050 Puma Trail, Littleton, CO
80125 (Certified Mail)
Laura
E. Beverage, Esq.,
and Karen Johnston, Jackson Kelly PLLC, 1099 18th St., Suite 2150,
Denver, CO 80202 (Certified Mail)
RWM
[1]
My order
was based upon the record developed at the hearing on two orders of withdrawal issued
under section 103(k) of the Act that directly relate to this compensation
proceeding. On October 29, 2014, I issued a decision in the contest cases for
these withdrawal orders, Hecla Limited, 36 FMSHRC 2749 (Oct. 2014). With
the parties’ agreement, the record from that hearing was incorporated by
reference in this proceeding.
Find out what applies today
This decision wasn't the final word: the Commission reviewed the case, and its decision is the one that controls. Ezel starts from the controlling decision and answers your specific situation under current law, with citations.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the authority it relies on.